Is the organic label worth the cost?

Kacey

Sr. Grandmaster
MTS Alumni
Joined
Jan 3, 2006
Messages
16,462
Reaction score
227
Location
Denver, CO
This is an issue I've been curious about for some time; seeing the referenced article on the news this morning caused me to start this thread.

From 9news.com (bold added, as I see this as the key part of the issue):

Organic food is one of the fastest growing categories in the food industry. In most cases, it can cost more than conventional food purchased at a grocery store, but is it worth it?
<snip>
Organic food is produced by farmers who emphasize the use of renewable resources and the conservation of soil and water to enhance environmental quality for future generations.

Organic meat, poultry, eggs, and dairy products come from animals that are given no antibiotics or growth hormones.

Organic food is produced without using most conventional pesticides; fertilizers made with synthetic ingredients or sewage sludge; bioengineering or ionizing radiation.

Before a product can be labeled "organic," a Government-approved certifier inspects the farm where the food is grown to make sure the farmer is following all the rules necessary to meet USDA organic standards.

USDA makes no claims that organically produced food is safer or more nutritious than conventionally produced food. Organic food differs from conventionally produced food in the way it is grown, handled, and processed.
<snip>
"There's no agreement from experts that pesticides are harmful when they are present in small amounts, but if you don't have to expose yourself, why not?" said Registered Dietician Sue Heikkinen with Kaiser Permanente.
 
It is just another version of bottled water, the idea gets instilled that it is "better" for you therefore they can charge more. Its like free range chicken, the legal definition basically says that the animals "must be allowed access to go outside," not that they actually do. If you are happy paying 3x the amount of money because you feel you will be healthier then go for it. The simple fact is, most of us could make up the theoretical negative cost of commercially produced foods by going out and exercising for an additional hour per week.

That said, I do spend money on organics when I'm cooking for a special occasion. Veggies are fresher, and the cuts of meats tend to be better.

Lamont
 
This is an issue I've been curious about for some time; seeing the referenced article on the news this morning caused me to start this thread.

From 9news.com (bold added, as I see this as the key part of the issue):

link

Here's a link that attempts to answer your question presuming that you already accept the idea that pesticides aren't good for you to consume.
 
USDA makes no claims that organically produced food is safer or more nutritious than conventionally produced food. Organic food differs from conventionally produced food in the way it is grown, handled, and processed.


This doesn't surprise me, because to claim that organically produced food is safer, the USDA would be implying that "normal" food is less safe, and the USDA rarely says anything bad about products they approve.


"There's no agreement from experts that pesticides are harmful when they are present in small amounts, but if you don't have to expose yourself, why not?" said Registered Dietician Sue Heikkinen with Kaiser Permanente.

I would guess that the lack of an agreement on the subject is due to industry politics.
I good friend of mine, who used to think that organic foods were just a marketing scheme, started eating ONLY organic foods after he got his masters degree in bio-chem and learned exactly how the pesticides break down in your body. I think that's pretty telling.
 
I have no scientific data to back this up, but it really feels like the 'recycled paper' scam of my childhood. Everybody started bragging that they were doing the recycled thing, but most of it was paying only token attention and fulfilling minimal requirements.

In the end, the same wastrels got $1 extra out of us for the same spiral notebook.

Not that I object to the idea in general.
 
Of course, we need to consider the old "If it doesn't kill you it will make you stronger" adage. Why pay more for something that won't make you as strong?
 
link

Here's a link that attempts to answer your question presuming that you already accept the idea that pesticides aren't good for you to consume.
Thanks - that's pretty much the same article I posted, just from NBC directly instead of the local affiliate I linked to.
 
My mistake. I didn't follow your link, just read your excerpts and I didn't make the connection.
 
I'm too old school. I buy organic veggies because they taste better. :D
 
As with many things in many industries, when something becomes 'trendy' it is more difficult to filter out the chaff from the wheat.

'Organic' when used as a marketing banner does not necessarily mean anything; like Blindside noted above, the Yuppie bottled (tap) water fad was a triumph of image over substance.

However, when it comes to things that you are going to ingest considerable quantities of, then, if you believe that what you eat affects your health, it pays to dig a little deeper (yeah, gardening pun attack! :D).

It also pays to apply a little common sense. Organically grown food that's been flown all the way from Australia is going to have lost many of the advantages the manner of it's growth gave it because of the inevitable decline of it's nutritional value. That doesn't count the environmental damage of air freighting lettuce etc.

There are other elements to consider with the rise of 'organic' produce.

These particularly apply to animal foodstuffs i.e. meat. High intensity livestock farming is, almost without exception, cruel. This is, of course, a moral judgement, not an economic or 'health' one per se.

For example, in our house, we will not buy Dutch bacon because of the way the animals are reared (which we feel is inhumane). As it happens, this also means that, altho' we pay more for our bacon, we get more for our money as the locally reared and slaughtered meat is not pumped full of water, salts and God knows what else, first. So when we cook it, the rashers don't shrivel to a sixth their original size and also still taste of something.

I know that it's an odd thing to express concern for how something is raised that, indirectly, you caused to be killed but it makes a difference to us (as a background aside, I was vegetarian for a decade or more, way before it became fashionable, as a direct result of working on a farm in my early years).

I think that if people saw for themselves the pitiful state that many factory farmed animals are in, they would think twice about eating them, especially considering the various hormonal and fat increasing supplements they are pumped full of. Did you know that chicken, factory reared, is not the healthy option most of us thought it was? Because of the 'supplements' it is actually very fat rich and not very good for you at all.

Now, the farthest thing from my mind is to be a 'health Nazi'. People must be free to make up their own minds on such an emotive issue as food. Plus, if you're on your uppers financially (Brit speak for "poor"), then your choices are more limited and being preached to high-mindedly about the morality of rearing methods obviously becomes aggrivating when it increases your shopping bill.

But (there's always a 'But' with a lead in like that isn't there :)), it makes no sense to me, if you can afford it, to voluntarily opt for a product that is not only inferior but also inflicts suffering that is a direct consequence of the drive to meet the demand for ever cheaper food.

On the (less emotive) vegetable front, for myself, I'd rather grow my own (organically). There is nothing that tastes better or is better for you than crops you pulled from your own garden five minutes before you eat them :D.

Again, if you don't have a garden then that is not an option and I have to say that I am as yet to see convincing evidence that organically grown food that has been flown 10,000 miles tastes any better than pesticide ridden, chemically fertilised, radiation hammered, produce that came from down the road.

Whether it's better for you is another matter. Personally, I'd rather avoid eating neuro-toxins if I can ... takes a sip of wine ... oops ... I sense the appropriatness of a phrase involving the words 'hoist' and 'petard' there :lol:.
 
I'm too old school. I buy organic veggies because they taste better. :D

My wife was extremely skeptical that there would be any noticeable difference. We bought Gala Apples at Wal Mart and at the Whole Foods. The very second she put a slice of that organic apple in her mouth it was written on her face.

So we buy it as a treat when we have time to make the drive to the Whole Foods, but we still buy "regular" mostly, because of convenience.
 
This is interesting. An intensive study was done here in Australia into the organic farming industry, especially vegetable growing. It was found that certification was state-based not federal, and there were actually eight or nine organisations you could get your certification from. Each organisation allowed a different level of organic pesticides and growth supplements, so what hit the stores had the organic tag but could be very different depending on where in Australia the product had come from.

The organic industry is huge down here. People seem quite happy to pay significantly more for organic fruit and veg. I don't know how well organics have penetrated our meat market, but, in general, its seems pretty much bullet-proof. It operates at pretty good standards anyway, but could do with improving.

On another point, Sukerkin mentioned bottled water. A study carried out here has shown that children who are exclusively drinking real filtered water are suffering significantly more dental problems than those who don't. I suppose there is always a price for following the trend.
 
It would follow that because kids taste buds are more sensitive to taste. organics may be a turn off to kids and getting them to eat veggies may be harder with organics.
Sean

?????
Not if things taste good.

My mom has always tended a small garden (and when we lived in Alaska not so small, .5 acre and a greenhouse), and the winter shift from fresh garden veggies to store bought was always a shock.

Lamont
 
Well, part of why I was asking was because I started buying organic meat, and I was hooked - but I'm not sure how much of that is the meat itself, and how much is that the packaging used for the organic meats I've been buying is vacuum sealed, rather than the plastic wrap used for non-organic brands - the vacuum seal keeps the meat fresher longer, and so I don't have to freeze it right away.

I've heard about the conditions for "factory" chicken... and also "factory" eggs, which caused me to switch to organic, cage-free eggs, although I admit I'm still working on the chicken - I need to finish what's in the freezer and then I'll probably switch that too.

It's the fruits and vegies I'm not as sure about - I grow some of my own in my garden (only 8' x 15'... but well-organized), but I haven't seen as much taste difference, and I do wash them thoroughly first... still thinking about that, although I do understand that thinner-skinned fruits and vegies are likely to have more problems than thicker-skinned, in general.
 
link

A book I found interesting on this general topic is called Omnivore's Dilemma. The "plot" involves the author eating various meals and describing where the food came from. He eats and "industrial food" meal (McDonalds), a "sustainalbe food" meal (similar in many ways to organic), and a "wild food" meal.

Although I have some knowledge of the food growing industry I found his description of "industrial" beef interesting and educational. The author claims that cows digestive systems are not designed to process as much corn as they are fed in modern CAFO environments and this causes a lot of the problems we have with disease and bacteria (in bovines). He claims this is not as big of a deal with pork and poultry since they have digestive systems capable of dealing with a lot of grain.

The book also goes into the "Organic" food industry but makes a distinction between locally grown food and the national organic food industry. That's a big part of the "sustainable" label he uses which I found to be a very interesting concept indeed. The author also claims that "Spring Salad" mix is an off-shoot of the organic food industry. It seems that some organic vegitables need to be harvested sooner that some sprayed vegitables which led to the marketing of young greens. The concept caught on with the consumer and it is now used for non-organic greens as well.

I really liked his description of "hunting" mushrooms for his wild meal. Unlike fruit, which is designed to attract and entice animals to eat it, mushrooms try to hide. Thus the use of the word hunting. I need to reread that section because I think there was a part about using a "seeing" technique to find mushrooms that reminds me of MA vision/sensing. I had not started MA when I read the book.
 
I really liked his description of "hunting" mushrooms for his wild meal. Unlike fruit, which is designed to attract and entice animals to eat it, mushrooms try to hide. Thus the use of the word hunting. I need to reread that section because I think there was a part about using a "seeing" technique to find mushrooms that reminds me of MA vision/sensing. I had not started MA when I read the book.

Some mushrooms try to hide, many do not. Many of the amanitas are bright and colorful and really poisonous. With regard to edible mushrooms, the matsutake hides pretty well, but you have to be careful because it looks almost identical to the Destroying Angel (one of the nastiest of the aforementioned amanitas). Chanterelles are obvious (bright orange) but they too have a poisonous look-a-like. Bolets, puffballs, and shaggy-manes are pretty obvious and safe for a beginner hunter. Anywho, you are correct I use a diffuse vision when searching for them, you are just looking for "breaks" in the litter pattern.

Lamont
 
My experiences and opinions (coming from a structural biochemist):

Organic foods are simply not worth the price premium paid. I've had organic meats before (and I don't mean kidneys and livers), and while they did taste good, it really wasn't any better than what I could buy off the shelf in a quality grocery store (such as Publix).

There are some drawbacks, aside from the price:

Some people may argue that not raising the livestock with antibiotics is a great thing. Maybe so, especially since antibiotic resistance could become a factor, but in this case, not using antibiotics tends to produce meats that become breeding grounds for even more bacteria.

While I do agree that some bacterial exposure is actually good, in that it helps keep your immune system excercised, I do wonder, if the multitudes of bacteria that will grow on the meats is really worth the trouble?

I do enjoy a medium-rare steak on a regular basis, and I really don't like the idea of having to spend extra time on the toilet, because my GI tract didn't agree with the bacteria that were still inside it. While some people may say "then cook your steak longer!" I'll simply tell them to shove off, since there's a magical thing about a medium rare cut of ribeye!
 
I once picked up a carton of "Special" eggs at the grocers, I'd have gotten away with it too but the Cashier said that will be $4.50 and I nearly had a BM
and asked if they had "Regular" eggs, answer yes, $0.89 per dozen

What a great Scam ehnit?

If you are that concerned raise and grow yer own.


O:nen ki' wahi'
 
Back
Top